Tweet
iiNet, Australia's third largest ISP, who is currently involved in a legal battle with the AFACT, Australia's own RIAA/MPAA, is putting two new lines of defence in court to battle the charges that it allows piracy to occur.
The AFACT argues that iiNet should disconnect customers that have allegedly been downloading pirated materials, but iiNet's barrister argues that to disconnect users based on "unproven allegations of copyright breaches" would breach provisions within the Telecommunications Act, which protects customer's privacy.
The other line of defence is that when the AFACT asks iiNet to take reasonable action to prevent copyright abuse, disconnecting customers would not be a reasonable step to take if the AFACT is not asking it's rivals to do the same.
iiNet issued a statement saying:
The AFACT will argue that the Telecommunications Act already gives ISPs like iiNet the power to disconnect users.
Obviously, my opinion is that iiNet's position is not only the correct one but also the legally sound one. What the AFACT is asking of iiNet is the same as a company asking your phone company to record and listen to your conversations, in the event that what you are doing is against the company's interests. There are clear phone tapping laws, and they should apply equally and more so to Internet tapping, as when privacy is concerned, the Internet should be considered even more private than the telephone (just think of the things you might say in an email but won't do so on the phone). If iiNet monitors and disconnects users, then it might opens itself up to lawsuits from these users on invasion of privacy, and in the event they get it wrong, then from users who were wrongfully disconnected. Then there's the issue of intent - did I intentionally download the pirated movie, or did I do it accidentally. And if I did intend to download a pirated movie, but failed to do so or stopped just before it finished, am I still breaking the law?
Whatever the answer, you do not want your ISP to be the ones deciding the answers to these questions, questions which would trouble most courts and expert judges, let alone some guy who's hired to spy on your usage.
More:
The AFACT argues that iiNet should disconnect customers that have allegedly been downloading pirated materials, but iiNet's barrister argues that to disconnect users based on "unproven allegations of copyright breaches" would breach provisions within the Telecommunications Act, which protects customer's privacy.
The other line of defence is that when the AFACT asks iiNet to take reasonable action to prevent copyright abuse, disconnecting customers would not be a reasonable step to take if the AFACT is not asking it's rivals to do the same.
iiNet issued a statement saying:
Originally Posted by iiNet
Obviously, my opinion is that iiNet's position is not only the correct one but also the legally sound one. What the AFACT is asking of iiNet is the same as a company asking your phone company to record and listen to your conversations, in the event that what you are doing is against the company's interests. There are clear phone tapping laws, and they should apply equally and more so to Internet tapping, as when privacy is concerned, the Internet should be considered even more private than the telephone (just think of the things you might say in an email but won't do so on the phone). If iiNet monitors and disconnects users, then it might opens itself up to lawsuits from these users on invasion of privacy, and in the event they get it wrong, then from users who were wrongfully disconnected. Then there's the issue of intent - did I intentionally download the pirated movie, or did I do it accidentally. And if I did intend to download a pirated movie, but failed to do so or stopped just before it finished, am I still breaking the law?
Whatever the answer, you do not want your ISP to be the ones deciding the answers to these questions, questions which would trouble most courts and expert judges, let alone some guy who's hired to spy on your usage.
More:
Comment